Monday, January 21, 2013

In
the blog magazine Dagelijkse Standaard,
Joost Niemöller writes (15
december 2012, “Het Marokkanenprobleem
is geen islamprobleem”, “The Moroccan
problem is not an Islam problem”) that the reduction of all problems
to Islam is stupid: “Look, this kind of thinking is not just dumb, it is also
dangerous. Whoever can only think of Islam as the root of all evil, moves
through the world blind with anger and has lost all ability to correct himself.”
He calls this thinking “hysterical”.

Probably
that article was written after its author had a discussion with someone who
obsessed over Islam, as described. But except for this putative debating
partner, is there really anyone to whom this allegation applies? I have never
met or read such a person, and I say this after having met many victims of
Islam in South Asia. Even Geert Wilders, whose Party For Freedom is routinely
labeled as “anti-Islam party” in the media, has campaigned for the 2012 on
another plank, viz. the relations between the Netherlands and the European
Union. In my experience, people who reduce all problems
to Islam are a figment of the Islam defenders’ fondest imagination.

Some people, allegedly, claim that Islam is
the reason for e.g. the misbehaviour of Muslim youngsters. The author, by
contrast, proposes “cultural, pedagogic and genetic explanations” in addition
to the Islam problem. Or even instead of it: “Moroccan boys are raised by their
mothers as little princes, and so they start behaving as spoiled brats.” There
are no indications that Turkish boys are raised that differently, yet according
to the author they have a lower criminality rate. For that matter, Hindu boys
are raised likewise and they stand out by a low crime rate. So, Niemöller’s
explanation by educational factors falls flat. However, the shortcomings in the
examples he chooses need not invalidate the case he is making. Indeed, we are
convinced along with him that Islam is not the only factor of evil.

Thus, to reiterate some examples he uses, the
high rate of violence in Brazil or the vast and variegated problems of Black
Africa exist outside the reach of Islam. Indeed, most world religions are older
than Islam and have a whole theology of evil, often with prescribed punishments
for a number of specified crimes. It seems evil existed before Mohammed, and we
will still have it on our hands after Islam has gone. Many critics of Islam are
Christians and Christianity famously teaches that all men are inheritors of
Original Sin, so Islam only added to a pre-existing store of evil.

Niemöller only expects criticism of his
arguments about Moroccan boys’ upbringing, so he counters it beforehand: “Now
the ‘true’ Islam critics
will undoubtedly start saying that this is a typical Islam problem is, and then
surely a Quran quotation can be found that points in that direction. But that
is of course nonsense.”

Frankly,
that one phrase is the reason why unlike so many media articles on Islam, this
one provided me with a reason to respond: “But that is of course nonsense.” (Maar dat is natuurlijk lariekoek, in the
original Dutch) In the 24 years since I first wrote in a critical sense about
Islam, pro-Islamic responses have mostly been of this calibre. Rather than
going into the contents of Islam criticism, where they know they can’t win, the
friends of Islam pretend that there is no honest debate because Islam critics
are a bunch of loonies. The whole Islam debate is between well-informed critics
quoting chapter and verse and superficial sympathizers resorting to rhetorical
tricks.

Actually, in
this specific case, Islam as a factor of problems is a valid (if only partial)
explanation. The double standard in the treatment of the sexes, by mothers as
by everyone else, already exists in the animal world, not to speak of most
human societies. Even hermaphrodite lower animals prefer the male to the female
role; the preference for a male over a female birth is much older than Islam. If
any problem predates Islam, or any other organized religion, sexism certainly
is it. But the effect of religion is to stick to such natural habits even
against pressure to reform. And this is where Islam trumps other religions:
whereas others make compromises with the modern world, Islam is still standing
firm. Feminism is making big inroads in Christianity, as exemplified by the
woman bishops in the Church of England; but hardly any into Islam.

Thus, when
Copts from Egypt or Sudan settle in Europe, they go by the rule: “When in Rome,
do as the Romans”, so they abandon any plans to circumcise their daughters. By
contrast, Muslims from the same region will stick to this custom, sanctioned by
Islam though dating from much earlier, against their European neighbours and
even against European law. They believe that their law is supreme, while the
law of the land is negotiable. Sexism was not invented by Islam, of course not,
but today Islam is a strong upholder of sexism in a world adopting more
egalitarian norms regarding the sexes.

In fact, very little was
invented by Islam. Except for the veneration of the person of Mohammed, most
doctrines and rules in Islam are taken from Arab Paganism, Judaism or
Christianity. The double standard in treating Muslims and non-Muslims was
adopted and adapted from a universal ethnic discrimination between in-group and
out-group. But whereas modernity consists in combating this natural tendency,
Islam upholds it. That parents frowned if their daughter married someone from
another religion, was common elsewhere too, but today only Islam insists that
she can never marry a non-Muslim, to the point of killing the groom or even their
daughter in order to prevent it.

That is why Islam poses
a very specific problem, different from the general immigration problem.
Immigrants from, say, Russia or Congo do pose certain social problems, but
because they do not militate against assimilation, at least their children are
bound to blend in and ultimately become Europeans with the Europeans. In the
case of Islam, it is the reverse: the present generation of Muslims is less
integrated than their parents. In expectation of becoming strong enough to take
our countries over, Islam cultivates separateness for now.

At the fag end of his
article, Niemöller also admits that Islam, while not being the sole problem, is
nonetheless a problem. He cites and rejects the opinion that “criticism of
Islam is really criticism of Muslims and therefore hurting and annoying”. He
also counters the usual remark about “the kind Muslim neighbour” by saying that
“he is mostly kind in spite of, and not because of Islam”. I can live with his
conclusion: “Yes, Islam is a problem. But not all problems with Muslims are an
Islam problem.”

2 comments:

He says “Look, this kind of thinking is not just dumb, it is also dangerous. Whoever can only think of Islam as the root of all evil, moves through the world blind with anger and has lost all ability to correct himself.”Well, that's good news ! At least there are people who think of islam as root of all evil !May God (that's our God) add to their number...!

http://www.chishtymission.comThis site is to enable more and more people to benefit from the blessings of Khawaja Baba and realise the power of All mighty Allah and his disciple, Khawaja Moinuddin Chishty of Ajmer.Ajmer sharif

About Me

Koenraad Elst (°Leuven 1959) distinguished himself early on as eager to learn and to dissent. After a few hippie years he studied at the KU Leuven, obtaining MA degrees in Sinology, Indology and Philosophy. After a research stay at Benares Hindu University he did original fieldwork for a doctorate on Hindu nationalism, which he obtained magna cum laude in 1998.
As an independent researcher he earned laurels and ostracism with his findings on hot items like Islam, multiculturalism and the secular state, the roots of Indo-European, the Ayodhya temple/mosque dispute and Mahatma Gandhi's legacy. He also published on the interface of religion and politics, correlative cosmologies, the dark side of Buddhism, the reinvention of Hinduism, technical points of Indian and Chinese philosophies, various language policy issues, Maoism, the renewed relevance of Confucius in conservatism, the increasing Asian stamp on integrating world civilization, direct democracy, the defence of threatened freedoms, and the Belgian question. Regarding religion, he combines human sympathy with substantive skepticism.